The Apprentice

I'm really looking forward to Wednesday's first episode of what is the only TV show that I enjoy at the mo (apart from Newsnight and Question Time, obviously!). And just as I fruitlessly apply to be in the audience of Question Time whenever I hear that it is going to be within hailing distance (and I count both Edinburgh and Birmingham as being within shouting distance of Lancaster), so I was also disappointed to learn that my application to be on The Apprentice this year was unsuccessful.

The thing that strikes me from browsing through the website is that I am certainly not that much less qualified than any of this year's contestants. Furthermore, as a sometime fan of the genre, I think that appearing on The Apprentice would be an enjoyable way to spend 3 months - living in a pleasant London mansion, taking part in engaging tasks every week and at least minor celebrity status to look forward to when I'm done. However, last night there was a documentary about last year's winner Tim, who as part of his 'prize' was assigned the role of trying to market useless Amstrad electronic tat to a sceptical public. I can't think of anyone I know who would fall for his 'electronic skin stimulation' scam, and quite frankly the criticism he comes in for from Sir Alan Sugar for failing to sell millions of units was unjustified. I can't think of a successful Amstrad product since the CPC 6128 which I used to play computer games when I was about eight years old.

Actually, I think that Sir Alan made the wrong choice in last year's series - if he really wanted someone to sell this useless equipment in bulk he should have chosen natural salesperson Saira as the winner. Tim seems a good natured, talented bloke but I think that the real reason that he was chosen is because he played the 'reality TV' game really well - that is to keep quiet in the early rounds, don't start arguments and generally keep your powder dry. Furthermore, Sir Alan probably saw something of himself in Tim's East End roots. This is a problem that worries me about recruitment - for all the objective tests and assessments, I think recruiters generally choose people with whom they most readily identify. This is why my heart sank when I arrived at an interview to find a panel of ladies from human resources awaiting me (why are all HR people female?). Not that I'm a chauvanist, just that since they were all from a non-technical background I didn't think that we all related that well. Though maybe I'm just paranoid and deluded... :-)